Avery v. Wellpath Health Care

E.D. Arkansas

Avery v. Wellpath Health Care

DecidedMarch 16, 2023

Docket4:21-cv-00035

StatusUnknown

This text of Avery v. Wellpath Health Care (Avery v. Wellpath Health Care) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Avery v. Wellpath Health Care, (E.D. Ark. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION

ROBERT W. AVERY PLAINTIFF ADC #652373

v. No: 4:21-cv-00035 JM-PSH

WELLPATH HEALTH CARE, et al. DEFENDANTS

ORDER The Court has reviewed the Findings and Recommendation submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Patricia S. Harris, and the objections filed. After carefully considering the objections and making a de novo review of the record in this case, the Court concludes that the Findings and Recommendation should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court’s findings in all respects. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 76) is granted and that Avery’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 70) is denied. Avery’s constitutional claims are dismissed with prejudice. The Court declines to exercise jurisdiction over Avery’s pendent state law negligence claims.1

1 See ACLU v. City of Florissant, 186 F.3d 1095, 1098-99 (8th Cir. 1999) (“[W]hen state and federal claims are joined and all federal claims are dismissed on a motion for summary judgment, the state claims are ordinarily dismissed without prejudice to avoid needless decisions of state law . . . as a matter of comity.”). See also Condor Corp. v. City of St. Paul, 912 F.2d 215, 220 (8th Cir. 1990) (“The judicial resources of the federal courts are sparse compared to the states. We stress the need to exercise judicial restraint and avoid state law issues wherever possible.”). DATED this 16th day of March, 2023.

UNJTED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION

ROBERT W. AVERY PLAINTIFF ADC #652373

v. No: 4:21-cv-00035 JM-PSH

WELLPATH HEALTH CARE, et al. DEFENDANTS

ORDER The Court has reviewed the Findings and Recommendation submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Patricia S. Harris, and the objections filed. After carefully considering the objections and making a de novo review of the record in this case, the Court concludes that the Findings and Recommendation should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court’s findings in all respects. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 76) is granted and that Avery’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 70) is denied. Avery’s constitutional claims are dismissed with prejudice. The Court declines to exercise jurisdiction over Avery’s pendent state law negligence claims.1

1 See ACLU v. City of Florissant, 186 F.3d 1095, 1098-99 (8th Cir. 1999) (“[W]hen state and federal claims are joined and all federal claims are dismissed on a motion for summary judgment, the state claims are ordinarily dismissed without prejudice to avoid needless decisions of state law . . . as a matter of comity.”). See also Condor Corp. v. City of St. Paul, 912 F.2d 215, 220 (8th Cir. 1990) (“The judicial resources of the federal courts are sparse compared to the states. We stress the need to exercise judicial restraint and avoid state law issues wherever possible.”). DATED this 16th day of March, 2023.

UNJTED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Avery v. Wellpath Health Care, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/avery-v-wellpath-health-care-ared-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack